. . . We know from those transcripts that Trump’s threat to hold up $391 million in military hardware and financial aid to our ally Ukraine — which is fighting a bloody war with Russia — until the Ukraine government gave him a “favor” by commencing an investigation of former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter, was not a one-off.[Let's not forget, Judge Nap's so-called bloody war between Russia and Ukraine is NONE of America's business. Taxpayer money should not be spent to help either side. And the less money spent on war, the sooner the war is over (if it ever starts), and the fewer lives are lost. And in today's political turmoil in Washinton DC that is apparently lost on Judge Nap.]

We know from the testimony of these witnesses that the demand for the favor was the end part of a months long concerted effort run by the president’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani — himself now the subject of two federal criminal investigations — to use the government of Ukraine to deliver dirt on Biden for Trump’s reelection campaign.[Judge, you are biasing yourself. There will never be ANY proof the co-called dirt (of which very much has come to light, BTW) on Biden is the effort of a sitting President for political ends. It is easily argued that El Trumpo is chasing criminal activities and the perps from the Obama administration (of which very much has come to light, also), exclusive of any and all campaign activities.]

Trump has argued that this was not a quid pro quo, e.g., give me the dirt on Biden, and you will get your American aid. He makes that argument solely on an incomplete transcript of his now-infamous July 25, 2019 telephone conversation with his Ukrainian counterpart who, when he asked for the aid, was met with the request for the favor.[And if it is quid pro quo, i.e., something for something, so what? Is something for something illegal? Isn't something for something a fundamental fixture of human society? Those blue jeans are forty bucks, that gasoline is $2.79 a gallon. Mom, I need more allowance. If you start keeping your bedroom cleaner . . . .] Should it be illegal for heads of government to quid pro quo each other? And of course El Trumpo is the first to do so? Please.]

Now back to Peggy Noonan. In her piece in last Saturday’s Wall Street Journal, she asked how history would view President Franklin Delano Roosevelt if, when asked by British Prime Minister Winston Churchill for help fighting the Nazis in 1940, he had conditioned that aid on the provision of dirt on Wendell Willkie, Roosevelt’s eventual Republican opponent in the 1940 presidential election. We would be repulsed to learn this.[Noonan does not know the answer to this, nobody does. Roosevelt may have very privately asked Churchill for a favor. And may have received it. This is nothing but (poor) speculation. There is ALWAYS inner dialog and outer dialogs. Noonan's is just one outer dialog with zero connection to the inner dialog. In other words, horse puckey.] [As an aside, I have little doubt this question was carefully composed, and the answer as cautiously crafted and rehearsed to cast light in a predetermined direction, against El Trumpo.]

Of course, Roosevelt never made such a Trumpian demand. He understood how vital the defense of Great Britain from the Nazi invasion was for humanity, for our ally and, ultimately, for American national security.[Of course, no one knows what demands Roosevelt might have made. And to compare a land feud and seccession squabble between Russia and Ukraine, bloody or not, to the Nazis over-running Europe is utter nonsense. We should not have any sort of 'alliance' with Ukraine. The US has nothing to gain by such relationships, and a lot of money to lose in the name of foreign aide. AND regarding political motives, Judge Nap, such motives are the only reason the US calls Ukraine an ally. Remember the old saying, an enemey of our enemy is our friend. And we must keep Russia labeled as an enemy, mustn't we?!] [As another aside, exactly how was the Nazi action in Europe a threat to the national security of the US?]

Trump’s demand manifested no such Rooseveltian understanding. In fact, Trump should have known that the act of soliciting assistance for his campaign from a foreign government, whether directly by him or indirectly by Giuliani, is defined as criminal under federal law — a high crime, as the Constitution puts it . . . .[Again Judge, 'soliciting assistance for his campaign' is a political contention raised by the Left. It is not fact nor proof. It is speculation. Yes, it makes a man named Biden (and his family), that is constantly campaigning for office (read as 'forever living on the taxpayers nut'), look bad. Tough toenails. Grow up. It is also part of a much larger investigation into high crimes committed by Obama, the Democratic National Committee, and the Clinton Foundation. Biden has been caught in the political purgatory of his own making. And that, Judge, is the bottom line that the House Democrats are trying to obscure. Have you joined them?]

[Judge Nap, you have lost your Libertarian bearings, if you truly ever had them. You are even losing your conservative Catholic bearings when it comes to your judgment of war and taxation.]

Logged

What light is to the eyes, what air is to the lungs, what love is to the heart, Freedom is to the souls of humankind.

Statism . . . ideas so good they have to be mandatory.

If voting made any difference, they wouldn't let us do it. -Mark Twain 1835-1910